Maybe the average consumer doesn't agree they are being treated like shit? Steam top 10 GPU list is almost all NVidia. Happy customers or duped suckers? I've seen the later sentiment a lot over the years and discounting consumer's preferences never seems to lead to correct prediction of outcomes..
GN were the OG "fake framers" going back to their constant casting shade on DLSS, ignoring it on their reviews, and also crapping on RT.
AI upscaling, AI denoising, and RT were clearly the future even 6 years ago. CDPR and the rest of the industry knew it, but outlets like GN pushed a narrative(borderline conspiracy) the developers were somehow out of touch and didn't know what they were talking about?
There is a contingent of gamers who play competitive FPS. Most of which are, like in all casual competitive hobbies, not very good. But they ate up the 240hz rasterization be-all meat GN was feeding them. Then they think they are the majority and speak for all gamers(as every loud minority on the internet does).
Fast forward 6 years and NVidia is crushing the Steam top 10 GPU list, AI rendering techniques are becoming ubiquitous, and RT is slowly edging out rasterization.
Now that the data is clear the narrative is most consumers are "suckers" for purchasing NVidia, Nintendo, and etc. And the content creator economy will be there to tell them they are right.
Edit: I believe too some of these outlets had chips on their shoulder regarding NVidia going way back. So AMDs poor RT performance and lack of any competitive answer the the DLSS suite for YEARS had them lying to themselves about where the industry was headed. Essentially they were running interference for AMD. Now that FSR4 is finally here it's like AI upscaling is finally ok.
I went from a 3070 to 5070 Ti and it's fantastic. Just finished Cyberpunk Max'd out at 4k with DLSS balanced, 2x frame gen, and reflex 2. Amazing experience.
About as tiring as hearing about it all the time. Thank god it's a fringe topic these days but this article snuck it in. Probably the constant use of the word "surveillance" was an early tell haha.
Except this president thinks he has the powers of a king. Which he doesn't, and courts are right to slap him down.
There's no such thing as "courts overstep" in our system. The courts are the final word on things in the US. By definition, they cannot overstep. You or I can disagree with their rulings, but they have the force of law, unless overturned by a higher court.
The courts are definitely overstepping. Note that I'm not arguing against injunctions by the higher courts. The issue is district court judges don't have jurisdiction outside their of their district and should not be trying to issue nationwide injunctions.
5x5 and 3x5 are out of vogue for lots of reasons but it largely boils down to:
* Not enough volume
* Non-periodized
That first bit means different things at different phases of a lifting "career". But generally speaking "time under tension" and research into effective rep ranges has changed modern thinking on set sizes and volume.
These days people, including World's Strongest Men, tend to recommend higher rep ranges for beginners and those coming back to the gym to build work capacity and reduce risk of injury.
If you are just starting out all that matters is going in to the gym regularly and lifting some weight. 3x5, 5x5, or some complicated periodized program with a lot of accessories are all going to work.
That's why I recommend keeping it simple. Build the habit and build some strength. Once you've done that, you can get fancy if you find that you're really into it.
A better training plan gives you a chance of winning competition. Most of us wouldn't win no matter what plan we follow (at my age only drugs could make me a winner and those have side effects I don't want), we just want enough strength for general life and health. With those more modest goals 3x5, 5x5, or since something not as good still will get us there.
Weird. I've lifted on and off for 25 years. For most of that time I did the stereotypical 3x8-12 and saw much slower progression. During the past couple years I switched to a 5x5 plan and saw massive gains in strength, even while I was cutting weight via a caloric deficit (was eating 1500-1600 calories a day, but had lots of protein and adequate carbs).
For reference, I went from a dumbbell bench press of 45lb to 75lb in 4.5 months (5x5). Previously my progress was much slower.
I'll caveat that I've obviously not closely controlled for all factors and I'm an n of 1. Additionally my interest is in having a great strength to weight ratio, rather than being a body builder. I'm a climber and that's an important consideration.
Out of vogue for beginners according to what/who? This is the first I'm hearing of a falloff of 3x5/5x5 for beginners, so I'm confused where this is coming from.
You have been lifting weights somewhat regularly for 25 years, majority 3x8-12, and the switch to 5x5 increased your dumb bell bench press from ~20kg to ~35kg?
There is just no way. That is extremely light weight. Like, most beginners who follow any sort of progressive overloading system will be at that level in 4 weeks starting from essentially 0
after 15 years of lifting, I'm currently pushing 4x10 with 50kg dumbbells on the bench.
So yeah, 35kg after 25 years seems odd unless those 25 years weren't exactly "serious" or "consistent" let's say.
3x5 like done by Starting Strength continues to work well for beginners looking for strength. After you tapped out the easy gains, you can use a periodized program for body building described by "the science" if you wish, but can do more useful weights because you are stronger.
reply